This then sets up something like a Generative Adversarial Network. The trouble is, such a setup is inherently unstable. Without careful guidance, one of the two adversaries will tend to dominate.
In predator/prey relationships in nature a stable relationship can come about if the predators starve and reproduce less when they eat too many of the prey. If, however, this effect isn’t strong enough (maybe the predators have several prey species), the result is the prey species can go extinct.
Also, the prey species is helped in multi-prey scenarios by becoming less common, and ths less likely to be found and killed by predators and less vulnerable to species-specific disease.
Obviously, these specific considerations don’t apply in a literal sense. I’m trying to point out the general concept that you need counterbalancing factors for an adversarial relationship to stay stable.
This then sets up something like a Generative Adversarial Network. The trouble is, such a setup is inherently unstable. Without careful guidance, one of the two adversaries will tend to dominate.
In predator/prey relationships in nature a stable relationship can come about if the predators starve and reproduce less when they eat too many of the prey. If, however, this effect isn’t strong enough (maybe the predators have several prey species), the result is the prey species can go extinct. Also, the prey species is helped in multi-prey scenarios by becoming less common, and ths less likely to be found and killed by predators and less vulnerable to species-specific disease.
Obviously, these specific considerations don’t apply in a literal sense. I’m trying to point out the general concept that you need counterbalancing factors for an adversarial relationship to stay stable.